together with the sole direction of such portion of his majesty's household as should be deemed requisite for the due attendance on his majesty's person, and the maintenance of the royal dignity. The queen was to have full power to nominate and appoint persons to any vacancies arising by resignation or death, in any of the departments of the king's household with certain exceptions; but not to remove any officer of the household that had been nominated or appointed by his majesty. During the continuance of the act, the office of lord chamberlain, then vacant, should not be filled, but its duties should be performed by an officer under the regent, to be called the vicechamberlain. The lord steward of the household, and the lords and grooms of the bedchamber, though under her majesty were not removeable at her pleasure, and vacancies arising by their death or resignation were not to be filled up. To assist in the execution of the trust vested in her majesty by the act, a council was appointed, which should, from time to time meet for the purpose of consulting and advising her majesty. Any vacancy accruing by death or resignation might be filled up, by the appointment of her majesty of any person being or having been a privy-counsellor. The members of this council were to meet on some day in the first week of April, and on the first day of every third month thereafter, to inquire into and declare the state of his majesty's health, and to transmit a copy of their declaration to the president of the privy-council. They were also to have power at all times when they might judge necessary, to examine upon oath the physicians and other persons attendant on the king during the continuance of his illness. With respect to the resumption of the royal authority, it was provided that when it shall appear to the queen and a certain number of her council that his majesty is in a state of health which will admit of his resuming the royal authority, it should be lawful to notify the same by an instrument under her majesty's hand, signed also by four or more of her council, to the lord president of the privy-council, or, in his absence to

one of the secretaries of state, either of whom was required to communicate it to the regent, and to summon a privy-council. If at any time, after that instrument has been received, his majesty shall think proper by an instrument under his sign manual to order the privy-council to be summoned, they are to assemble accordingly, and if by the advice of his privycouncil so assembled, his majesty shall signify his royal pleasure to resume the personal exercise of his royal authority, then a proclamation to that effect is to be issued and all the powers given under the regency act are to cease and determine, the royal authority being to all intents and purposes resumed by his majesty. In case of the death of the regent the lords of the privy-council are to issue a commission in his majesty's name, under the great seal, announcing the same, and in case of the death of the queen in a similar obligation was imposed on the regent: and in either case, or at the resumption of the royal authority, the parliament if separated by adjournment or prorogation is to meet and sit, and if there shall be no parliament in being, the members of the preceding parliament are forthwith to meet and sit. The letters patent, letters of privy seal, and all other lawful authorities which have been issued by his majesty for the payment of any sums out of the monies applicable to the use of his civil government, for the use of the queen or of any of the branches of the royal family, are in full force during the continuance of the re gency. Ample provision is made respecting the real and personal property of his majesty, during his indisposition, by rendering the persons who have the care and management of it, subject to the control and direction of trustees. Nothing contained in the act is to be construed to invalidate or affect the disposition already made or which may hereafter be made by his majesty of any such property, either before or after his illness, which would have been, or would be, a good and valid disposition of the property if the act had not been passed.

Such is the ontline of the bill for pro

viding for the administration of the royal authority during the king's illness. In the discussions which attended its progress through both houses, many of the arguments which had been adduced during the passing of the resolutions, were repeated. On the subject of restrictions, Mr. Ponsonby, in the house of commons, proposed that the period of their duration should be limited to six months certain, but the clause introduced by the chancellor of the exchequer, fixing it to be twelve months, and subject to prolongation by parliament, was carried. The use of the restriction as to peers, was stated to be, that the king might on his recovery find the house of lords in the same state; and here a degree of mistrust was implied, lest the time might expire at a period when parliament would not be sitting, and when the regent might have it in his power to create peers before it could be determined whether the restriction ought to be continued. Mr. Ponsonby also moved amendments on the clause respecting the household, by which he proposed to except from the control of the queen, the offices of lord steward, and of master of the stag hounds. These however were negatived, and the original clause stood. With respect to the queen's council, the bill of 1789 was followed as a precedent. In that bill, besides the two archbishops, lords Thurlow and Kenyon, the then chancellor and chief justice, were included, as well as the lord chamberlain, the lord steward and the master of the horse. With the exception of the lord chamberlain, the persons now holding the same offices were nominated, and to supply the deficiency caused by the exception, the master of the rolls was proposed by the chancellor of the exchequer to be one of the queen's council. Lord George Cavendish proposed the duke of York as one of the council, but this was negatived on the ground that none of the royal family ought without strong and urgent necessity to be appointed to responsible situations. It was also agreed, that the appointment to the queen's council should apply not only to the office, but to the person then holding it; hence the names of the members

were specified, and hence another restriction was placed on the regent. It was contended, that as he was not to have the custody of the king's person, so he should also be excluded from the nomination of any of those to whom this custody was to be entrusted.

The mode of declaring the king's competency to resume his authority, was considered by lord Milton as requiring to be as solemn and public as that which had been appointed to declare his incapacity. The fact of his recovery had to be certified by the queen and her council, to the privycouncil, and he thought it would be infinitely better that parliament should de clare the capacity of the king. Mr. Perceval, to obviate the objection against the clause respecting the king's recovery, proposed that his majesty himself should have the power to summon the council to examine into the state of his health.

In the debate ou the report of the bill, a very animated discussion took place chiefly relating to the amendments which had been proposed in the committee. The clause respecting the household was by some considered as directly at variance with the resolutions, and as likely to produce the most dangerous consequences. The prince of Wales had undertaken to accept the regency under certain restrictions, yet the house in its subsequent proceedings was imposing additional shackles on his royal highness. Such conduct, observed, Mr. Brand, could be esteemed as little better than a fraud on the regent. Was it becoming that the only appointments in the household placed at his disposal should be the captain of the yeomen of the guard, and the captain of the band of gentlemen pensioners? The effect of withdrawing from the regent the influence now proposed to be placed in the hands of the queen, might even prevent him from exercising the affairs of government with force and efficiency. To this it was replied that the bill was not in every respect founded on the resolutions, and was indeed, in point of form ordered to be brought in without a reference to them. Regard however had been paid to the conditions.

they involved; for a portion only of the household was given to her majesty; that portion might in different opinions be greater or less than it ought to be, but the clause was conformable to the original resolutions. The division on the report, was in favor of ministers by a majority of 22. By the regulations respecting the household, a sum of not less than £400,000 per annum was actually taken away from the influence of the crown, and placed at the disposal of the queen, who was not responsible for its application. Far from there being any check to the disposal of this money, her council was to be composed of persons appointed by name, and not on account of high office, since their successors, in case of death, were not to supply their places.

When the bill went through a committee of the house of peers the same line of argument was pursued as in the commons. On the question respecting the duration of the restrictions lord Grenville proposed the term to expire in August 1811, instead of February 1812. This amendment was negatived. On the clause respecting the household, the marquis of Lansdowne, after exposing the gross inconsistencies with which it abounded, moved that after the words vesting the care of his majesty's person with the queen, together with the sole direction of such portion of his majesty's household as should be deemed requisite and suitable for the due attendance of his majesty's sacred person, and the maintenance of his royal dignity there should be inserted" and as shall be specified in an act of parliament to be hereafter passed, and until the passing of such act, no officer of his majesty's household shall be removed, and that if any vacancy shall happen in any office in his majesty's household it shall not during such time be filled up." At the close of a very interesting debate, during which the forcible arguments of earl Grey, drew from the lord chancellor an earnest and impassioned vindication of his principles and conduct, the original clause was negatived by a majority of twelve against ministers; and the amendment of the marquis of Lans

downe was carried by a majority of nine. On a subsequent motion respecting the disposition of the privy purse, earl Grey observed, that as it was a fund intended for the protection of the arts and for the encouragement of improvements that tended to the honor and advantage of the country, it ought to be wholly at the disposal of the regent. Lord Liverpool stated, that it was a fund as well for private beneficence as for public bounty, and therefore it ought strictly to be applied to those purposes to which, it was presumed, the sovereign would himself apply it. Lord Moira also considered it as a fund applied to purposes of beneficence, the great merit of which frequently consisted in the secrecy with which such favors were dispensed. It was impossible that any thing more painful to the sovereign, could occur, than to know that his application of such a fund had undergone parliamentary investigation.

On the 28th of January the regency bill was reported in the house of lords, and after a long discussion and several divisions, the amendments made in the committee, where absentees are not allowed to vote by proxy, were all overruled, and the bill was restored to the same state in which it came from the commons, with the exception of some verbal alterations. In the course of the debate, earl Grey repeated a very serious charge, which he had made against the lord chancellor on a preceding evening. He maintained that it appeared in evidence, that both in 1801 and 1804, the king's name was used' in acts that could not be performed without the royal assent and concurrence, when it appeared that the king was laboring under an indisposition exactly similar to the present. In thes year 1801 and 1804, "we know," said his lordship, "that councils were held, and members were sworn in, at a time when his majesty was in a complete state of mental incapacity. On the 17th of March, measures of the most important nature, in which the interests of the country were vitally concerned, took place. Expeditions were fitted out; and we know from evidence laid before your lordships, that on the 14th and 15th of

March, the king fell into a paroxysm which continued several days. So much with regard to 1801. In 1804, a noble viscount (lord Sidmouth,) when asked in another house, if there was any suspension of the royal functions, said there was no suspension, and, when pressed a little farther on the subject, he afterwards shifted a little, and said there was no necessary suspension. The noble lord on the woolsack also thought fit to make a suitable declaration to this house. Now it appears, upon the evidence of Dr. Heberden, that his majesty was, at this period, in a state of mental incapacity. He stated, that from February 12th, 1804, to the 23rd of April following, when he believed that his majesty presided at a council, he was in attendance on him, and he considered the duration of the king's illness to have extended from the 12th of February to the 23rd of April. This is the statement of Dr. Heberden. In that interval we know that several acts took place which required the royal interposition. On the 9th of March a commission under his sign manual was passed; on the 15th of March the royal assent was given to several bills; and all these took place at a time when, Dr. Heberden states, his majesty was laboring under a mental incapacity. I believe that the noble lord would not have stated what he did to your lordships without his believing in the truth of it; but will the house endure it? Will you suffer the highest offices of the king's prerogative 'to be executed in his name, when you have in evidence that he was then unfit to discharge any of the royal functions." To this charge no satisfactory answer given. The facts stated were grounded on the evidence of Dr. Heberden, delivered on oath, in the presence of his majesty's principal ministers of that day, lord Sidmouth, lord Eldon, and lord Liverpool being present, as members of the committee, none of whom appear to have put a single question to the witness, that might ascertain any remission of the disease within the specified period. Thus, while his majesty was in a state of mind, similar to that which now called for a suspension

was

of his royal functions, the ministers concealed it from parliament, and obtained the sign manual for affixing the great seal to commissions for passing statutes by the royal assent. And while this assent was solemnly pronounced in the house of lords, the ministers must have been aware, that the king was attended by physicians, whose authority and control over their patient was supported by the ordinary attendants in such cases. On these grounds a motion was made by lord King for omitting the name of lord Eldon as one of her majesty's council; and, on its rejec tion, a protest was entered by earl Grey and other peers in opposition, stating in substance the facts above-mentioned.

When the verbal amendments in the regency bill had been agreed to by the commons, the two houses concurred, after considerable discussion, in a resolution for giving the royal assent to it by commission; accordingly, on the 5th of February, a conference having previously taken place with the commons, the lord chancellor announced to the house of peers, that a commission had issued under the great seal, for giving the royal assent to an act which had passed both houses of parliament. The archbishop of Canterbury, the lord chancellor, the lord president of the council (earl Camden,), the lord privy seal (earl of Westmoreland,). and the duke of Montrose, took their seats as commissioners. The attendance of the house' of commons having been requested, the speaker, and a great number of members appeared at the bar. The lord chancellor said-" My lords, and gentlemen of the house of commons, inasmuch as for certain causes, his majesty cannot conveniently be present here this day, a commission has issued under the great seal to us and other lords directed, reciting the letters patent of the 15th of January, for opening and holding the present parliameut, and the passing of an act agreed upon by both houses, and notifying the royal assent to the said act, which commission you will now hear read." The commission was read at the table by the reading clerk. The lords named in it,